What’s insane about the entire situation is that the grammy award winning producer wasn’t even involved in the accident!

A woman has filed documents naming Nash, as well as his company, among the defendants in a lawsuit over an accident she was involved in with one of his EMPLOYEES.

Details below…

According to TMZ, a woman named Elaine Nowells has filed a suit in Georgia, claiming that in June 2012, Patrick Thrall, one of The-Dream’s record label employees, ran a red light at a 4-way intersection and t-boned her vehicle.

Nowells claims the accident was so brutal, the car was knocked on its side and slid down the street.

Nowells claims she broke her back in the accident and suffered mental and physical pain due to “the shock, fright and terror she experienced.” She claims she suffered permanent injuries and says her medical expenses are through the roof.

In her suit, Nowells claims the accident was all Thrall’s fault … because she says Thrall was distracted by his GPS at the time.

Nowells filed her suit against Thrall … but added The Dream and his company as defendants as well. She alleges that since Thrall was on-duty at the time, they can all be held financially responsible.

The Dream responded to the lawsuit via email, stating:

Pat Thrall Is NOT an EMPLOYEE of Radiokilla Records, IDJ, or any of its affiliate companies.

He is an independent contractor (engineer) who was on the way to his hotel when the accident occurred. We are sorry to hear about her injuries and we hope she gets better.

We are almost certain that her attorneys put pressure on her to file a lawsuit. Unfortunately, that’s the NEW American Dream. Can’t win in life, sue someone who can.

Ouch!

But he’s right though…. they always go after the big dogs.

Should The-Dream (or his company) be financially responsible for an automobile accident of an “independent contractor”?

I hope the judge throws this nonsense out of court. I guess her claims are baseless if he’s an independent contractor, nice try lol. I’m sure they have the paperwork on that. Of course her attorney will still try and fight it because of what’s at stake.

Independent contractor or not it only depends if he was on duty or performing a duty for their job. Now, it says he was on his way to his hotel, so that means that he wasn’t on duty for his employe. case closed, so she can only sue the engineer. But, since he probably has money, then she should be fine, because when you get in an accident with someone you can sue other forms of insurance too, like home or business liability. So she should be ok, at least financially, if not mentally or emotionally.

These internet lawyers lawwwwd. The doctrine she’s suing under is respondant superior. This means an employer is liable for their servants negligence while the servant is acting within the scope of their employment. Saying a person is an independent contractor is an affirmative defense to respondant superior. These are questions of fact to be decided by a jury. This will probably be settled to avoid the cost and time of trial.